Brave new (1.0) world.

[chromatic]

On Thursday 19 February 2009 12:49:14 Andrew Whitworth wrote:

> Great point (although I think it's a little bit mis-timed). If 1.5 is
> released in July (?) then there will 4 releases between 1.0 and 1.5. A
> question on my mind is "What happens if we have 5 relatively major
> additions/updates/improvements land in each consecutive release
> between 1.5 and 2.0?" If we stick with the system we've been using to
> differentiate between major/minor monthly updates, then we would need
> to fudge the numbers in this scenario.
>
> And I hope the answer to the question above is not "Let's just hope we
> never get so lucky".

That's why I like the date-based scheme.

Alternately, we could skip all of the debates about what's major and minor and 
how many real numbers there are between 1.0 and 1.5 or 1.5 and 2.0 and say:

	July		1.5(.0)
			1.5.1
			1.5.2
			1.5.3
			1.5.4
			1.5.5
	January	2.0(.0)

That satisfies the property that version numbers should increase and it gives 
the numerologists slightly less ammunition to tell us what the spirits of our 
ancestors are trying to tell us through tea leaves and tattooed chicken bones.

Note also that the push-to-1.0 approach came about because Allison said "Screw 
this milestone approach with its major features; let's just set a hard 
deadline and start throwing out non-critical features."  I'd hate to let the 
infatuation with what's major and what's not creep back in and siphon away 
this great momentum we seem to keep building.

--c